Press Release
March 21, 2025
In the last episode, since February 20th, our editor-in-chief Sherry Lee, as a member and former candidate for chairman of the Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA), has been exercising her statutory rights as a member to review the association’s accounts. She has uncovered that the HKJA, as a trade union, is suspected of using “underhanded tactics” to conceal its accounts, obstructing Lee’s access to the account books and obtaining copies of the annual statement of account, blatantly violating the Trade Unions Ordinance. This episode is even more exciting. Faced with Lee’s relentless pursuit of the accounts, what strategies will the HKJA employ in response? Will they ultimately be able to clear themselves? The HKJA represents the news industry and should be fair and impartial, and this article will thoroughly expose its true nature.
Lee Requested Accounts of 12 Years, But the HKJA Would Only Provide Statement of Accounts of One Year
In Lee’s email response to the HKJA on February 28th (See picture below), she clearly pointed out the provisions of Rule 12 and 13 of the association’s constitution, as well as the statutory rights granted to members by the Trade Unions Ordinance to inspect account books and obtain copies of the annual statement of accounts. The HKJA was fully aware that denying her access to the account books, statement of accounts, and registered rules was illegal, so they resorted to the tactic of “delaying”.
On March 5th, the deadline Lee had given the HKJA to provide the information, the association replied to her via email, stating, “We are processing your application, please wait patiently.” (See picture below) Lee did not challenge them and simply waited and waited. Eight days later, on March 13th, the HKJA finally sent an email, and as expected, it was another cunning method to conceal the accounts (See the blue text and picture below):
Dear Ms. Sherry Lee:
Regarding your application to inspect the documents of our association, we will provide you with: (1) a copy of the registered rules, and (2) a copy of the annual statement of account for 2023/24. Please come to our office to collect the copies on Saturday, April 5th, between 1:45 PM and 2:45 PM.
Additionally, we will provide copies of the annual statement of accounts from the 2010/11 to 2022/23 for inspection. Please come to our office to inspect them on Saturday, April 5th, between 1:45 PM and 2:45 PM. Please adhere to the following rules when inspecting the accounts and constitution:
1. Each inspection is limited to one hour. If you need to review again, please make another appointment.
2. The content of the documents reviewed must not be disclosed in any form, or shared with others.
3. You are not allowed to take photos or photocopy the documents. If necessary, you may take notes.
The Hong Kong Journalists Association
The HKJA’s response on March 13th indicates that the association has allegedly violated the Trade Unions Ordinance and the HKJA’s constitution with details as follows:
First, Failing to Provide Copies of Statement of Accounts violates the Trade Unions Ordinance
According to Section 19 of the Trade Unions Ordinance mentioned in the first episode, if any person (note: including any member of the public or a member) requests a copy of the rules of a registered trade union and prepays a fee not exceeding $2, the trade union must provide a copy of its rules to that person. Section 36(3) stipulates that every member of a trade union has the right to obtain a free copy of the statement of account. (See picture below)
In her email to the HKJA on February 28th, Lee stated, “According to the Trade Unions Ordinance, all trade unions, including the HKJA, must provide the following to members requesting information: 1) a free copy of the statement of account, and 2) a copy of the registered rules for a fee not exceeding $2. Therefore, please comply with the law and provide me with the account books for the fiscal years 2010/11 to 2023/24, and all versions of the registered rules, via email by March 5th.”
However, in their email on March 13th, the HKJA stated that they would only provide Lee with a copy of the statement of account for one year (the 2023/24 fiscal year) and a copy of the registered rules (implying the latest version), instead of the copies of the statement of accounts for the fiscal years 2010/11 to 2023/24 and all versions of the registered rules that Lee had requested. Lee had previously inquired with the Registry of Trade Unions (RTU) and learned that members have the right to request copies of statements of accounts for different fiscal years. The HKJA’s failure to provide the statement of accounts for the requested fiscal years and all versions of the registered rules, as requested by a member, has violated Sections 19 and 36.
Second, Not Allowing Lee to Inspect the Account Books Violates the Trade Unions Ordinance and the Association’s Constitution
Although the Trade Unions Ordinance only requires trade unions to provide members with copies of the annual statement of accounts, it stipulates that trade unions must allow members to inspect the accounts. This point is very clear; please review the following ordinances and the HKJA’s constitution:
- Section 37 of the Trade Unions Ordinance, “Inspection of accounts”, states: “The account books of a registered trade union and the register of the members thereof shall be open to inspection by any officer or member of the trade union or any authorized agent thereof at such times and in such place as may be specified in the rules thereof…”. (See picture below)
- Section (m) of Schedule 2 of the Trade Unions Ordinance stipulates that the rules of every registered trade union shall “ensure reasonable opportunity for the inspection by members of the trade union of the rules of the trade union, its account books and the registers of the names of the members thereof”. (See picture below)
- Rule 13 of the HKJA’s constitution, “Inspection of Books”, states, “Any member will be allowed to inspect the account books, the registered rules of the Union, and the register of members.” (See picture below)
- Rule 12 of the HKJA’s constitution, “Auditors”, under section 12.3 stipulates that “A copy of any auditor’s report shall be conspicuously placed at the office of the Union.”. (See picture below)
From the above, the HKJA must, in accordance with Section 37 of the Trade Unions Ordinance and Rules 12 and 13 of the constitution, allow Lee to inspect the auditor’s reports, account books, and registered rules. Lee had repeatedly requested, in various emails (dated February 20th, 27th, and 28th), to inspect the auditor’s reports, account books, and all versions of the registered rules for the 12 fiscal years from 2010/11 to 2023/24. However, the meaning of the association’s response here is to not allow Lee to inspect the account books and auditor’s reports, only providing her with the “annual statement of account” for inspection. Why is that?
Lee obtained a sample of the annual statement of account from the Registry of Trade Unions (RTU), which is a three-page form provided by RTU for trade unions to fill out, recording income, expenditure, asset, and liability data. Each year, the HKJA also submits an annual statement of account signed by an auditor to the RTU, as required by the ordinance. The annual statement of account records total income and expenditure without detailed data, which is entirely different from the account books and auditor’s reports.
The account books are the most detailed financial records of an institution, recording every transaction of income and expenditure. The auditor’s report is the income, expenditure, asset, and liability report verified by an accountant after reviewing the account books. By only allowing Lee to inspect the annual statement of accounts and not allowing her to inspect the account books and auditor’s reports she requested, the HKJA is blatantly violating its constitution and Section 37 of the Trade Unions Ordinance! Please note one point: in the first response to Lee’s application on February 28th, the association indicated that she could “inspect the account books and rules” (See picture below, note: but required Lee to comply with unreasonable rules during the inspection). But now they have suddenly manipulated the data Lee requested for inspection to “annual statement of account,” with the intent of providing Lee with less information!
Adding “Rules” Again to Make it Hard for Lee to Inspect the Statement of Accounts – What Devilish Details Are They Hiding?
Although the data obtained from inspecting the annual statement of accounts would be limited, the HKJA seems to be afraid of any slip-ups and worried that from which Lee might find any important information. Therefore, in their email on March 13th, the association once again required Lee to comply with three “rules” when inspecting the documents (the same rules they required Lee to follow in their email on February 28th). They include limiting her to completing the inspection within one hour (from 1:45 PM to 2:45 PM on April 5th); not disclosing the content of the documents; and not photocopying or taking photographs. These rules once again violate the Trade Unions Ordinance.
In their email on February 28th, the HKJA’s requirement for Lee to comply with the same inspection “rules” already violated the ordinance. By repeating the same mistake in their email on March 13th, the association arbitrarily added unregistered “rules” to the constitution, not only making it difficult for members to conduct inspections but also infringing on members’ statutory rights. The HKJA is fully aware that their actions allegedly contravene the Trade Unions Ordinance, but if they do not want Lee to see the account books, they can only take this risk and act illegally!
As mentioned above, the statement of account is merely a record of totals, making it difficult for the inspector to identify problematic items. Even with such a simple account statement, the HKJA does not allow Lee to take photos for record-keeping. What exactly are they trying to hide in the statement of account? Is the devil in the details? One point is worth questioning: the HKJA already has the statement of accounts in hand, and the annual statement of account for each year is only three pages long, totaling 36 pages for 12 years. Why does the association wait until April 5th to allow Lee to inspect them?
This raises suspicions that the HKJA intends to delay, and if we speculate further, could someone be planning to “falsify accounts” during this period? This is purely speculative, but if this speculation is correct, allowing Lee to quickly inspect might be an attempt to give her a false impression that the numbers she sees are fine. This also explains why the HKJA does not allow Lee to take photos for verification.
Additionally, we learned from the Registry of Trade Unions that the HKJA has amended its rules multiple times since its establishment, and each modification was submitted to the government, with the association also keeping its own records. Why couldn’t they provide Lee with the different amended versions of the rules as she requested, and instead only allowed her to collect a copy of the registered rules, i.e., the latest version? Could there be something shady about the past amendments to the rules?
HKJA Replied on the 19th, Still Not Providing Financial Documents Requested by Lee
In the early hours of March 14th (Friday), Lee sent another email to the HKJA (See picture below), not only reiterating her request for the required information but also asking them to remove the rules. The content is as follows:
- To provide her with copies of the annual statement of accounts for the years 2010/11 to 2023/24 via email, one copy for each year, and copies of all versions of the registered rules since the establishment of the HKJA (each amendment to the rules constitutes a new version).
- Given the long-standing request for accounts, she demanded that the HKJA provide the relevant copies of the statement of accounts to her by Monday (March 17th). To prove that the documents were issued by the HKJA, she requested that they send the copies to her via email, rather than requiring her to collect them from the association’s office.
- Lee requested that the HKJA arrange for her to inspect the account books and auditor’s reports for the years 2010/11 to 2023/24 on Monday (March 17th), and she demanded that the association not set any rules for inspecting the documents.
However, after the deadline of March 17th passed, the HKJA did not respond to Lee. On the day before yesterday (Wednesday, March 19th), at 12:42 PM, just over an hour before we released the first episode of the press release, namely “The Hong Kong Journalists Association does not provide account books to its members, allegedly violating the Trade Unions Ordinance (1)”, the HKJA sent her an email. The content was similar to the email sent on March 13th, once again not providing the information requested by Lee. The content is as follows (See the blue text and picture below):
Dear Ms. Sherry Lee:
Due to the time required to arrange personnel, please come to our office on Saturday, April 5th, between 1:45 PM and 2:45 PM, to collect (1) a copy of the registered rules, and (2) a copy of the annual statement of account for 2023/24, and to inspect the copies of the annual statement of accounts from 2010/11 to 2022/23.
Hong Kong Journalists Association
As with the previous replies, the HKJA will only provide a copy of the statement of account for one year, not for all the years she requested; they will also only provide a copy of the rules, not the copies of all versions of the registered rules since the establishment of the HKJA (each amendment to the rules constitutes a new version) as she requested.
The account statements for 12 years consist of only 36 pages. The staff can simply retrieve the documents from a computer or file cabinet and photocopy them in the office’s photocopier, a process that would not take more than two hours. Excluding the fact that Lee had already requested the account documents since February 20th, even if the HKJA only started preparing the copies after receiving Lee’s latest email on March 14th (last Friday), they still had four working days from the 14th to the 19th to prepare. With eight hours of work per day, that’s 32 hours—is that not enough time to prepare the documents? This photocopying task could be completed by one person within two hours, and the HKJA has two staff members—couldn’t they arrange for someone to photocopy in four days? The HKJA’s explanation is hard to believe and is clearly an excuse to refuse to provide Lee with the 12-year statement of accounts she needs.
Lee requested that they “provide via email copies of the annual statement of accounts for the years 2010/11 to 2023/24, one copy for each year, and copies of all versions of the registered rules since the establishment of the HKJA (each amendment to the rules constitutes a new version).” However, in their reply on March 19th, the HKJA acted as if they did not see Lee’s request regarding the rules, not mentioning it at all, clearly unwilling to provide them. Why does the HKJA not want to provide the different versions of the rules to Lee? Could there be some secretive matters in the changes to the rules? By not providing copies of the statement of accounts and rules, and only arranging for Lee to inspect the statement of accounts, they are once again violating Sections 19 and 36 of the Trade Unions Ordinance (See pictures below).
In her email on March 14th, Lee requested that the HKJA arrange for her to inspect the account books and auditor’s reports from 2010/11 to 2023/24, but the association acted as if they did not see this request. In their email on March 19th, they completely ignored her demand to inspect the accounts, continuing to violate the constitution and Section 37 and Schedule 2 of the Trade Unions Ordinance, which grant members the statutory inspection right (See picture above). The HKJA also did not respond to Lee’s request that no “rules” be set for inspecting the documents; they simply did not mention the “rules” in their response. This means that the “rules” required in their previous email are still in effect, and if Lee violates these rules, she will be expelled from membership! We will analyze this point below.
Suspected of Using “Delay Tactics” and “Playing Dumb” to Evade Legal Responsibility
Given the HKJA’s continuous uncooperative attitude, we believe they are using “delay tactics” to make Lee go back and forth with requests, dragging it out repeatedly! This delaying tactic is very cunning. On the surface, the HKJA does not reject the member’s request to inspect and obtain copies, claiming they are “processing” it, thinking this way they can avoid breaking the law. However, the principle of the law is that the information must be provided within a “reasonable time.” Lee submitted her application to the HKJA on February 20th and gave them a “reasonable time” to prepare the relevant information (by February 26th for the account books and rules of the last three years, and by March 5th for the account books and rules of all years), but up to now, a full month has passed, and the HKJA has not been able to produce the account books and auditor’s reports for even a single year!
Additionally, the HKJA is suspected of using the tactic of “playing dumb” by providing information that is not what Lee requested (for example, providing the statement of account for only one year instead of all years). If taken to court, the HKJA could claim that they did not understand Lee’s request and did not intentionally fail to provide the statutory information, in order to evade legal responsibility. However, Lee clearly stated the information she requested and cited the ordinance in each email. Even if they did not understand Lee’s request, they could still provide the information based on the law. Therefore, if the HKJA tries to defend themselves by claiming they “misunderstood Lee’s request” for not providing the statutory information, such an argument cannot be upheld.
HKJA’s Tactics Are a Double-Edged Sword, Potentially Expelling Lee to Prevent Her from Inspecting Accounts
The HKJA’s response is a double-edged sword!
If Lee does not inspect the accounts and make the matter public, the HKJA can easily tell the media that they allowed her to come and inspect the accounts, and without any limit on the number of visits, thereby misleading readers through the media. Media that do not delve into the details, as well as some media with unclear backgrounds, will then publish headlines stating—”the HKJA Refutes Sherry Lee’s False Accusations, Claiming They Gave Her the Opportunity to Inspect, But She Did Not Show Up,” and so on. The chairperson and executive committee members of the HKJA are media people and are, of course, familiar with such media tactics. Their responses can be said to be well-prepared!
If Lee decides to go and inspect the accounts, it means she agrees to these “rules”. If she ultimately violates them, for example, by using her phone to photograph documents on-site or disclosing information to a third party, the HKJA can attack her for breaching their agreement, not only suppressing her legally but also tarnishing her reputation for being dishonest. More dangerously, the HKJA can revoke her membership according to section 3.7 under Rule 3 “Membership” of the constitution (See picture below, which states “All members must abide by the rules of the Union. Any member breaking the rules of the Union may be liable to reprimand, suspension of membership or expulsion by the Executive Committee.”). Even if Lee uses her phone to photograph the account books or discloses information, which does not violate the constitution because the constitution does not prohibit it, the HKJA can forcefully claim that Lee violated the constitution and expel her, immediately stopping her from continuing to inspect the accounts.
Although Rule 3, in section 3.7, of the constitution states that “Any member reprimanded, suspended or expelled shall have the right to appeal to the Appeals Tribunal…There will be the right of final appeal to the Annual or Extraordinary General Meeting.”, the HKJA can also slow down the appeal process, making it indefinitely long for Lee to regain her membership, during which she would lose the right to inspect the accounts as a member. Even more sinisterly, revoking her membership would also prevent Lee from running for office in the future, removing a thorn in their side (our previous press releases have already detailed the “behind-the-scenes manipulation and election rigging” by the HKJA to block Lee from running, and the public can revisit the series of press releases on our website to understand the events). The HKJA’s tactics kill two birds with one stone and can be described as “killing without spilling blood”! It is hard to imagine that the HKJA, which usually speaks of righteousness and morality, could be so cunning!
Setting Up Obstacles to Hinder Account Inspection, Revealing Careful and Cunning Plan
The HKJA’s two replies pretended to allow Lee to inspect the accounts while actually setting up obstacles to hinder her. This “scheme” was clearly devised by a group of people. They thought that they could avoid breaking the law, conceal what they wanted to hide in the accounts, and set a trap to cancel her membership, dealing with Lee in the long run. However, their cleverness backfired, as they did not anticipate that their additional “rules” not only allegedly violated the Trade Unions Ordinance but also exposed their carefully and cunning plan.
For years, this union representing journalists has been loudly advocating for “press freedom,” but they prohibited Lee from disclosing the content of the documents and reporting on it, which not only severely lacks transparency but also harms press freedom! If Lee discovers any shady dealings in the accounts, such as embezzlement of funds, embezzling for personal gain, or questionable sources of donations, is she not allowed to report on it or inform other media to cover it? The HKJA’s action seriously infringed press freedom!
The HKJA’s actions are a preemptive intimidation of Lee, threatening her not to report, yet they have the audacity to claim they protect journalists? From the HKJA’s tactics in this incident, we can see the hypocrisy of an organization that has always claimed the moral high ground. On the surface, they advocate for press freedom, but, they do the opposite, harming press freedom and threatening media workers!
The hidden accounts incident reflects the dishonesty of those controlling the HKJA, to a degree that is chilling. The HKJA’s severe lack of integrity in this incident, blatantly violating its constitution and the Trade Unions Ordinance, and depriving members of their statutory rights, is like stripping off their long-standing “fair and just” facade.
The HKJA’s Chairperson and Executive Committee Cannot Escape Blame — Are They the Culprits or Mere Pawns?
Lee sent emails to the HKJA requesting the account books, and each email reply from the HKJA was signed as “Hong Kong Journalists Association,” representing the association. According to Rule 7.1 of the HKJA’s constitution, the Executive Committee is responsible for managing the association and conducting its business. Therefore, the decision to not provide the account books, copies of the annual statements of accounts, and different versions of the registered rules for Lee to inspect, must have come from the Executive Committee, which is responsible for managing the association.
Thus, the current HKJA chairperson and former Wall Street Journal reporter Selina Cheng, and the other executive committee members (including Vice-chairperson Leung Yiu-chung (freelancer), Executive Committee Members Cheng Cheuk-ling (Social Media Editor, Channel C), James Griffiths (Asia Correspondent, The Globe and Mail), Carol Lai (freelancer), Joe Leung Cho-yiu (Senior Reporter, Hong Kong 01), Hans Tse Tsz-fung (Reporter, Hong Kong Free Press), and Theodora Yu (freelancer) cannot escape blame nor shirk legal responsibility for the suspected concealment of accounts. However, are they the masterminds behind the incident, or are they merely pawns being manipulated? We do not have an answer to this!
Last May, the HKJA used “behind-the-scenes manipulation and election rigging” to prevent Lee from running for chairperson in the 2024-25 Executive Committee election. Selina Cheng, who was an executive committee member at the time, could not have been unaware of this. However, Cheng never publicly questioned the election’s shady dealings and became the sole candidate for chairperson, automatically winning without competition. Through the incident of the HKJA’s alleged concealment of accounts, her integrity will be called into question. Through the mysterious dismissal at The Wall Street Journal, Selina Cheng was portrayed fearless in the face of tyranny, but who is the real tyranny here? Through the election rigging and concealment of accounts incidents, the public can make a fair judgment.
True Report emphasises that, just like the previous “behind-the-scenes manipulation and election rigging” incident, in this case, we are criticising not the HKJA itself, but the people controlling it. The HKJA’s mission to protect “press freedom” is noble, and freedom is very important for a democratic society. However, the people behind it are not noble or honest, using the HKJA as a puppet to engage in improper behaviour.
Under the control of humans, the HKJA may seem like a beautiful light, but is wrapped in darkness within.
Through the mysterious dismissal at The Wall Street Journal, Selina Cheng was portrayed fearless in the face of tyranny, but who is the real tyranny here?
This Incident Prompts Media Professionals to Reflect and Start Anew!
The HKJA lists the “Code of Ethics” on its website, emphasizing the ethics that journalists should adhere to, including “a duty to maintain the highest professional and ethical standards”，“strive to ensure that the information he/she disseminates is fair and accurate”，“avoid the expression of comment and conjecture as established fact and falsification by distortion, selection or misrepresentation”. However, the HKJA’s severe lack of integrity in the concealment of accounts incident raises the question: are they still qualified to teach journalists to adhere to these professional codes?
The HKJA, which champions press freedom, should lead by example in defending the public’s right to know. However, in this incident, those controlling the association hid statutory information and deprived members of their right to know, blatantly breaking the law. How can they, with such unrighteousness, have the authority to monitor society and the government? It’s a laughingstock!
The concealment of accounts incident is worthy of public reflection, suggesting that individuals and organizations standing on the moral high ground may not necessarily be moral. Wearing the crown of “press freedom” does not automatically turn them into uncrowned angels deserving absolute trust! This incident can prompt media professionals to reflect on whether the direction the HKJA has been leading the media in recent years is correct and just, and to reorient their thinking and start anew!
This media reiterates that we oppose those who control the HKJA, but we support the HKJA itself. We must emphasize again that Hong Kong cannot function without the HKJA; otherwise, society would become even more corrupt. In recent years, Hong Kong has seen the phenomenon of “oligarchic rule”, we need journalists to courageously step forward and exercise the media’s role as the fourth estate to monitor political parties and the government. The HKJA can play the role of “leading journalists and strengthening the fourth estate.” To fulfill this role, the HKJA needs to strengthen its integrity and remove those who undermine this, clearing out stagnant blood, to allow the HKJA to be reborn. We hope that the HKJA, which has stood in Hong Kong for over half a century, can transform like a butterfly, ultimately emerging from its cocoon to become a stronger warrior, leading the media to fight a victorious battle for Hong Kong society!
As a fair and impartial media outlet that clearly distinguishes between right and wrong, “True Report” has ambitions and hopes to help Hong Kong’s media regain its strength and courageously protect this city together. We voluntarily and fearlessly take on the responsibility of exposing the improper behaviour of those controlling the HKJA, with the aim of driving the transformation of the HKJA and then leading the media to become a force for monitoring society.
This is the deeper significance of our exposure on the incident of HKJA’s concealment of accounts.
If the Accounts Are Upright and Frank, Why Not Allow Members to Inspect Them?
It has been a month since Lee applied to inspect the account books on February 20th, and the fact that HKJA has not allowed members to inspect them within a “reasonable time,” has allegedly violated the Trade Unions Ordinance. Regarding various regulatory violations by the HKJA, Lee has formally filed a written complaint with the Registry of Trade Unions today. These include the association’s unauthorized addition of unregistered rules, setting up obstacles to make it difficult for members to inspect the account books, disallowing members to inspect the account books, not providing copies of statement of accounts for the requested years, and not providing different versions of the registered rules—all of which violate the Trade Unions Ordinance. We are currently awaiting a response from the registry.
On the history page of their website, the HKJA states that their “independence” is fundamental to them, claiming “we accept no direct subsidies from any government or commercial organisation. Our operations are funded by membership fees and fund-raising efforts which includes an annual dinner.” If this statement is true, the financial sources of the HKJA should be very clean, so why are they being so secretive?
If the HKJA’s account books are upright and frank, why not provide them for members to inspect? Why even resort to underhanded tactics to block members’ legitimate right to inspect the accounts? What exactly is the HKJA trying to hide? Are the association’s funds shady? The actions of the HKJA are indeed very suspicious, which makes our upcoming release of the final episode of the “Friends Investigating Friends” investigation into the HKJA’s “behind-the-scenes manipulation and election rigging” incident even more significant, allowing people to see the true face of the HKJA more clearly!
The final episode of the “Friends Investigating Friends” investigation press release will be released in two parts next week, so please stay tuned.
We will continue to investigate the HKJA’s accounts and will notify everyone as soon as there is any news!
True Report
21 March 2025
This press release is translated from our Press Release in Chinese, published on March 21. During the preparation, we used an AI tool, DeepSeek. We have reviewed and edited the content as needed to ensure accuracy of translation.